US Elections 2012 Part II: The Conventions, Debates and Election results

User Name

Remember Me?

Password

Notices

Trouble logging in?We were forced to invalidate all account passwords. You will have to reset your password to login. If you have trouble resetting your password, please send us a message with as much helpful information as possible, such as your username and any email addresses you may have used to register. Whatever you do, please do not create a new account. That is not the right solution, and it is against our forum rules to own multiple accounts.

they do realize without federal dollars from the intrusive government, their state would be in even worst shape Also this time around if they secede no one is going to do anything except throw a party.

It is pure politics, the kind you've been railing against in this thread since its inception.

Oh I know James, I didn't say I agreed with it.
I'm actually not sure what to think of it at this point.
I took it as symbolic when I first read it, and thought that should be obvious to everybody, must be just how I think...I dunno.

they do realize without federal dollars from the intrusive government, their state would be in even worst shape Also this time around if they secede no one is going to do anything except throw a party.

they do realize without federal dollars from the intrusive government, their state would be in even worst shape Also this time around if they secede no one is going to do anything except throw a party.

Considering that the clean-up after Katrina is STILL going on and the mis-handling by FEMA and the government. I doubt very much these people really care about any more government involvement.
And I think the Texas state constitution has a clause on seceding from the union if they want?

Many Americans do not like the Feds poking around into their private lives and this is a symbolic way of showing them their displeasure.

Healthcare is not a private matter. Not in terms of how it functions as a system. It's a drag on the debt and deficit. It's full of bureaucracy, red tape, and inane policy. It overwhelmingly benefits those who stand to profit over the quality of care itself. It's a crazy patchwork of programs, companies, and administrations with too much overhead and cost for the results produced.

I get that you're big on the whole libertarian thing, but there are just some things that work better when government, together with citizen participation and oversight, do the job. It's not like Universal Healthcare is something never tried before. It exists, it works, and it produces better care and lower costs than the American system which frankly...is abominable for a nation with so much wealth in money, skills, people, and technology.

I'm not jumping up and down for the AFA. It's essentially an insurance industry handout. But it is a step, a tiny, conservative step, but it is a step in the direction toward changing attitudes. This isn't like owning a car or a house. You don't need those things, there are options. Healthcare is imperative. Everyone gets sick and injured. Those without, or who don't seek, healthcare, are a burden on society. A burden the rest of us have to pay for, in more ways than one. It is our obligation as part of the social contract to take care of each other, even if it's for the selfish reason of wanting the same thing for ourselves when our time of need comes. We're the herd of animals with leaders in the front, and defenders in the back. We're not supposed to leave the weak and unfortunate behind as we move forward. We're better than survival of the fittest. We make our own destiny.

Private industry has had plenty of chances to step up and find a free market solution to this problem. They failed. But, in all of the nations with government run health care, there is still a private industry option that works alongside it. Both work fine, with no conflict, and people are happy. I see zero reason that can't be possible here.

"The government" isn't some nameless Machiavellian villain working in dark backrooms determined to screw people out of their rights. It's just a tool of society that creates policy. It's subject to human flaws like peer pressure, confirmation bias, and false narrative. It's subject to poor voter understanding of issues, leading to bad candidates and policies. It's subject to money, for all of its corrupting influence. It is a reflection of who we are as a people, ultimately.

In the end though, it's just a thing. The Constitution is just words on paper. The Founding Fathers were just men. These things are as big, small, unchangeable, changeable, as we permit them to be. They are man made, not laws of nature. They themselves created something were once was nothing. Why we chain ourselves down instead of exercising that same freedom is beyond me sometimes.

Healthcare is not a private matter. Not in terms of how it functions as a system. It's a drag on the debt and deficit. It's full of bureaucracy, red tape, and inane policy. It overwhelmingly benefits those who stand to profit over the quality of care itself. It's a crazy patchwork of programs, companies, and administrations with too much overhead and cost for the results produced.

Which is why Obama should not have signed onto the federal version of Romneycare and should have instead pushed for a version of healthcare as invisioned by Thomas Jefferson.

I get that you're big on the whole libertarian thing, but there are just some things that work better when government, together with citizen participation and oversight, do the job. It's not like Universal Healthcare is something never tried before. It exists, it works, and it produces better care and lower costs than the American system which frankly...is abominable for a nation with so much wealth in money, skills, people, and technology.

I am not a Libertarian personally, I vote Libertarian because they are the closest thing I can vote for to a classical liberal.

Healthcare is imperative. Everyone gets sick and injured. Those without, or who don't seek, healthcare, are a burden on society. A burden the rest of us have to pay for, in more ways than one. It is our obligation as part of the social contract to take care of each other, even if it's for the selfish reason of wanting the same thing for ourselves when our time of need comes. We're the herd of animals with leaders in the front, and defenders in the back. We're not supposed to leave the weak and unfortunate behind as we move forward. We're better than survival of the fittest. We make our own destiny.

We partially agree here.
Healthcare is not an imperative, it's a good idea, but not a right in and of itself.
It is a service, and if we want our society to be where everyone has it, we must either amend the constitition and make it a right protected by it, or we must make it a service that is provided for using the taxing power of congress.
As it stands it is a mandate to buy a product or pay a penalty, and thus it is more a benefit to the insurance companies and IRS than it is to the people.
Interesting how it either benefits corporations or the government, but not the citizenry at large.

Private industry has had plenty of chances to step up and find a free market solution to this problem. They failed. But, in all of the nations with government run health care, there is still a private industry option that works alongside it. Both work fine, with no conflict, and people are happy. I see zero reason that can't be possible here.

That's because these companies (like Big-Pharma) are huge corporations that have been allowed to destroy the system through profiteering, drug laws (like the prohibition of holistic remedies such as marajiuana) and other corporatist practices.

Quote:

"The government" isn't some nameless Machiavellian villain working in dark backrooms determined to screw people out of their rights.

Government. No.
Political parties. Yes.
You know, the Democrat-Republican Party.

We had a fantastic government (though flawed in many ways) before the corporatists began altering it into something it was never intended to be (starting in 1913): a totalitarian system.

Quote:

It's just a tool of society that creates policy. It's subject to human flaws like peer pressure, confirmation bias, and false narrative. It's subject to poor voter understanding of issues, leading to bad candidates and policies. It's subject to money, for all of its corrupting influence. It is a reflection of who we are as a people, ultimately.

I partially disagree with your vision of government.
We agree that government is a tool.
We're we disagree is what the nature of that tool is.
History has shown without doubt that government has the power vested in it to use force: be that force war, taxes, imprisonment or other powers.
Therefore, the primary function of government is force, nothing more, nothing less, and that force must be controlled lest it become extremely destructive.
It is for this reason that classical liberals like myself hold that the government that governs least governs best.
However, governing isn't providing services.
If a people contract out to their government for a service, then it is the duty of said government to provide said service due to the will of the people (in a Republican form of government anyway).
Governing is telling you how to live: i.e. excercising authority over a person or persons through the administration of policy and/or laws.

Since we're speaking of strictly healthcare here I'll stick to that as my example.
For healthcare to be within the confines of the constitution, the SCOTUS had to declare it a tax because even they said a mandate to buy a product is unconstitutional.
Nevertheless, while it may be a "tax" on paper via the SCOTUS decision, it is in actual practice a mandate to buy a product since you will now HAVE to buy insurance from a private company or pay the penalty to the IRS (if your employer doesn't cover your insurance).

I'm curious to know what's going to happen if someone doesn't pay the fine, and doesn't get insurance and is self-employeed.

That is going to be very interesting.

Quote:

In the end though, it's just a thing. The Constitution is just words on paper. The Founding Fathers were just men. These things are as big, small, unchangeable, changeable, as we permit them to be. They are man made, not laws of nature. They themselves created something were once was nothing. Why we chain ourselves down instead of exercising that same freedom is beyond me sometimes.

In the united states of America, the contract that creates the Federal government and gives it the jurisdiction and authority is the constutition. It is not a simply words on a piece of paper, it is the contractual agreement between the people of the states and their respective governments to create a central body that will govern interstate issues with an emphasis on common defense, taxes, and uniformity of law and protection of the inalienable rights of citizens of all states.

We bind ourselves to contracts such as these so that anarchy doesn't reign supreme and to protect ourselves from tyranny.

__________________

Last edited by GundamFan0083; 2012-11-10 at 20:24.
Reason: whoops, used the forbes article instead of the Washpost one.

Therefore, the primary function of government is force, nothing more, nothing less, and that force must be controlled lest it become extremely destructive.

I will butt in a little, IMO the function of the function of the government is to regulate* and to do said function it has the monopoly to apply force on individuals and organizations. Therefore governments should never centralize the use of that force (in or outside itself) and adhere to rigid laws governing the use of force, otherwise it is no different from ancient monarchies.

*Sadly the word regulation has become the enemy for many people in the USA, makes me wonder how do they think the human body work without regulation (coded into our DNA) or computers would work without regulation (coded into the operative system of your choice).